Allowed

Abubakar Aurangjeb Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC20 Dec 2023BA/3660/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application for sexual assault and cyber offences, the High Court granted bail to the applicant. The Court noted that further incarceration was unnecessary given the delay in the FSL report, which was not the accused's fault. Bail was granted subject to conditions including posting a bond, residing outside the victim's locality, and attending police station monthly.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with provision of a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions restricting movement near the victim and ensuring availability for trial.

Abubakar Aurangjeb Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

25_ba_3660_2022.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

BAIL APPLICATION NO.3660 OF 2022

¶4

Abubakar Aurangjeb Shaikh...Applicant

¶5

Versus
The State of Maharashtra...Respondent

¶6

Mr. Khalid Azmi for the Applicant.
Mr. H.J. Dedhia for the Respondent-State.

¶7

CORAM: G.A. SANAP, J.

¶8

 DATE : 20th DECEMBER, 2023.

¶9

P.C.:-

¶10

1. The accused has made this application for bail in Crime

¶11

No.1048 of 2021 registered at Kasturba Marg Police Station, Borivali,
Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 354-
A, 354-D and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 67(A)
of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶12

MEGHA SHREEDHAR PARAB

¶13

Digitally signed by MEGHA SHREEDHAR PARAB Date: 2023.12.22 16:23:30 +0530

¶14

2.The learned Advocate for the accused submitted that for
more than two years the accused has been behind bars. There is no
progress in the trial. Learned Advocate submitted that he has been
falsely implicated in this case. Learned Advocate submitted that the

Megha

1/6

25_ba_3660_2022.doc

victim is major and the case of the prosecution that she was
subjected to sexual assault against her consent, is totally
unbelievable. Learned Advocate pointed out that till date the report
of the analysis of the mobile data of accused is not received.
Learned Advocate pointed out that mobile phone of the victim and
her relatives have not been seized and sent for analysis. Learned
Advocate submitted that in the teeth of the shaky evidence further
incarceration is neither necessary nor warranted. Learned Advocate
submitted that the accused is ready to abide by the conditions that
may be imposed by the Court.

¶19

3.Learned APP submitted that despite four reminders to
FSL, Kalina, analysis of the data of the mobile has not been done.
Learned APP submitted that accused had taken nude photographs of
the victim while she was taking bath and on the basis of those
photographs, he pressurised the victim to submit to his demands of
sexual favour. The learned APP submitted that the victim was
threatened to make the photographs viral and under these threats
the victim was compelled to prepare her nude videos. Learned APP
submitted that the accused pressurised the victim to forward her

Megha

2/6

25_ba_3660_2022.doc

videos to him. Learned APP submitted that in order to compel the
victim to have sexual relationship with him, the video were
circulated to her relatives. Learned APP submitted that considering
the serious nature of the crime, the accused cannot be released on
bail. It is submitted that the possibility of tampering of prosecution
evidence by extending threats to the witnesses cannot be ruled out.

¶24

4.It is to be noted that the accused was arrested on
28/09/2021. The mobile phone of the accused was seized during
the course of the investigation and was sent to FSL, Kalina for
analysis. It is pointed out that despite repeated reminders the FSL,
Kalina has not analysed the data and submitted the report. It is to
be noted that in the absence of FSL report it would not be possible
for the Trial Judge to commence the trial. The accused, in my
opinion could not be held responsible for this. The accused has been
languishing in jail from 28/09/2021.

¶25

5.At the stage of deciding bail application the merits of the
matter cannot be gone into. The material collected and compiled in
the charge-sheet cannot be tested on the touchstone of credibility.

Megha

3/6

25_ba_3660_2022.doc

For the purpose of appreciation of the submissions made in support
of the bail application, the court has to take into consideration the
entire material. On consideration of the material, prima facie the
Court has to decide whether the case in question is fit to exercise the
discretion in favour of the accused or not. The victim, on the date of
the incident was 23 years old. She has two children. The accused
on the date of the incident was 24 years old. It is the case of the
prosecution that from May-2021 to July-2021 the victim was
blackmailed and subjected to sexual assault by the accused. The
victim all along was residing with her husband. She did not make
any complaint to her husband. The relatives of the victim, to whom

¶30

allegedly the obscene videos were forwarded have stated that they
have deleted the videos received from the accused. The victim has
stated that her mobile phone, in which this data was stored, had lost.
In my view, all these facts and circumstances are in favour of the
accused. In the facts and circumstances, in my view further
incarceration of the accused is neither necessary nor warranted. The
prosecution is not in a position to make concrete statement as to the
time, that would be taken for analysis of the mobile data. In my
view therefore, the accused cannot be kept behind bars for indefinite

Megha

4/6

25_ba_3660_2022.doc

period awaiting the FSL report. The apprehension put-forth by the
learned APP can be taken care of by imposing appropriate
conditions. Hence, following order:-

¶35

ORDER

¶36

(i) The application is allowed;

¶37

(ii) The Applicant-Abubakar Aurangjeb Shaikh, be

¶38

released on bail in Crime No.1048 of 2021

¶39

registered at Kasturba Marg Police Station,
Borivali, Mumbai, for the offences punishable
under Sections 376(2)(n), 354-A, 354-D and
376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section
67(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000,
on his furnishing P.R. Bonds in the sum of
Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like

¶40

amount;

¶41

(iii) The Applicant shall not enter the locality where the victim has been residing viz. Borivali.

¶42

(iv) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶43

(v) The Applicant shall not pressurise, threaten or

Megha

5/6

25_ba_3660_2022.doc

induce the prosecution witnesses directly or

¶48

indirectly.

¶49

(vi) The Applicant shall attend Kasturba Marg Police

¶50

Station, Borivali, Mumbai on the first day of

¶51

every month between 11.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m.,

¶52

till completion of the trial.

¶53

6.It is made clear that observations made herein above be

¶54

construed as expression of opinion only for the purpose of granting
bail and the same shall not in any way influence the trial Court.

¶55

7.The application stands disposed of in above terms.

¶56

(G.A. SANAP, J.)

¶57

Megha

¶58

6/6

Abubakar Aurangjeb Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abubakar Aurangjeb Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Christina Arvind Pathare Vs State of Maharashtra

Nabiul Hena Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Arun Shripal Vaidya Vs State of Maharashtra

Saddam Mainuddin Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Nainesh Harshadbhai Makwana and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Prasanjit Pradip Debnath Vs State of Maharashtra